I'm trying to test a scheduler that I wrote. I schedule two processes - both are infinite while loops (just while(1) statements). When I run the program sometimes it segfaults after like ten seconds (sometimes 5 sec, sometimes 15 or more). Sometimes it doesn't segfault at all and runs as expected. I have a log file which shows me that both processes are scheduled as expected before the segfault occurs. I'm trying to debug the errors using gdb but it's not being very helpful. Here's what I got with backtrace:
#0 0x00007ffff7ff1000 in ?? ()
#1 0x000000000000002b in ?? ()
#2 0x00007ffff78b984a in new_do_write () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#3 0x000000000061e3d0 in ?? ()
#4 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
I don't really understand #2.
I think this may be a stack overflow related error. However, I only malloc twice in the whole process - both times when I'm setting up the two processes, I malloc a pcb block in the pcb table I wrote. Has anyone run into similar issues before? Could this be something with how I'm setting/swapping the contexts in the scheduler? Why does it segfault sometimes, and sometimes not?
You didn't tell how you obtained the stack trace that you show in the question.
It is very likely that the stack trace is bogus not because the stack is corrupt, but because you've invoked GDB incorrectly, e.g. specified wrong executable when attaching the process or examining core dump.
One common mistake is to build the executable with -O2 (let's call this executable E1), then rebuild it with -g (let's call this E2) and try to analyze core of live process that is running E1 giving GDB E2 as the symbol file.
Don't do that, it doesn't work and isn't expected to work.
Since your stack seems corrupted, you're probably correct that you have a stack buffer overflow somewhere. Without the code, it's a little difficult to tell.
But this has nothing to do with your malloc calls. Overflowing dynamically allocated buffers would corrupt the heap, not the stack.
Whay you'll probably need to be looking at is local variables that aren't big enough for the data you're trying to copy in to them, like:
char xyzzy[5];
strcpy (xyzzy, "this is a bad idea";
Or passing a buffer (again, most likely on the stack) to a system call that writes more data to it than you provide for.
They're the most likely causes though theoretically, of course, any undefined behaviour on your part could cause this. If the solution is not evident based on this answer, you'll probably need to post the code that caused it. Try to ensure you trim it down as much as possible when you do that so that it's the shortest complete program that exhibits the bug.
Often you'll find by doing that, the problem becomes evident :-)
Related
How can I debug a C application that does not crash when attached with gdb and run inside of gdb?
It crashes consistently when run standalone - even the same debug build!
A few of us are getting this error with a C program written for BSD/Linux, and we are compiling on macOS with OpenSSL.
app(37457,0x7000017c7000) malloc: *** mach_vm_map(size=13835058055282167808) failed (error code=3)
*** error: can't allocate region
*** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug
ERROR: malloc(buf->length + 1) failed!
I know, not helpful.
Recompiling the application with -g -rdynamic gives the same error. Ok, so now we know it isn't because of a release build as it continues to fail.
It works when running within a gdb debugging session though!!
$ sudo gdb app
(gdb) b malloc_error_break
Function "malloc_error_break" not defined.
Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y
Breakpoint 1 (malloc_error_break) pending.
(gdb) run -threads 8
Starting program: ~/code/app/app -threads 8
[New Thread 0x1903 of process 45436]
warning: unhandled dyld version (15)
And it runs for hours. CTRL-C, and run ./app -threads 8 and it crashes after a second or two (a few million iterations).
Obviously there's an issue within one of the threads. But those workers for the threads are pretty big (a few hundred lines of code). Nothing stands out.
Note that the threads iterate over loops of about 20 million per second.
macOS 10.12.3
Homebrew w/GNU gcc and openssl (linking to crypto)
Ps, not familiar with C too much - especially any type of debugging. Be kind and expressive/verbose in answers. :)
One debugging technique that is sometimes overlooked is to include debug prints in the code, of course it has it's disadvantages, but also it has advantages. A thing you must keep in mind though in the face of abnormal termination is to make sure the printouts actually get printed. Often it's enough to print to stderr (but if that doesn't make the trick one may need to fflush the stream explicitly).
Another trick is to stop the program before the error occurs. This requires you to know when the program is about to crash, preferably as close as possible. You do this by using raise:
raise(SIGSTOP);
This does not terminate the program, it just suspends execution. Now you can attach with gdb using the command gdb <program-name> <pid> (use ps to find the pid of the process). Now in gdb you have to tell it to ignore SIGSTOP:
> handle SIGSTOP ignore
Then you can set break-points. You can also step out of the raise function using the finish command (may have to be issued multiple times to return to your code).
This technique makes the program have normal behaviour up to the time you decide to stop it, hopefully the final part when running under gdb would not alter the behavior enuogh.
A third option is to use valgrind. Normally when you see these kind of errors there's errors involved that valgrind will pick up. These are accesses out of range and uninitialized variables.
Many memory managers initialise memory to a known bad value to expose problems like this (e.g. Microsoft's CRT will use a range of values (0xCD means uninitialised, 0xDD means already free etc).
After each use of malloc, try memset'ing the memory to 0xCD (or some other constant value). This will allow you to identify uninitialised memory more easily with the debugger. don't use 0x00 as this is a 'normal' value and will be harder to spot if it's wrong (it will also probably 'fix' your problem).
Something like:
void *memory = malloc(sizeof(my_object));
memset(memory, 0xCD, sizeof(my_object));
If you know the size of the blocks, you could do something similar before free (this is sometimes harder unless you know the size of your objects, or track it in some way):
memset(memory, 0xDD, sizeof(my_object));
free(memory);
I have several core dump files created by manually killing a memory leaking process. I'm trying to open it with GDB, however gdb reports that (no debuggung symbols found). From what I understand, that means that the program was compiled without -g option, which is correct, and because of that, GDB has nothing to catch. I however, want to only open the core dump file, I need to read it in order to find some sort of memory leak. I can try to recompile program with -g flag, however following executable will no longer be the same as the one that produced the core dump file.
When I try to do a backtrace, I get this
#0 0x0000003c992325e5 in ?? () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x0000003c99233dc5 in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#2 0x00007f961117d3f2 in PrepareDumpAreas () from /opt/mqm/lib64/libmqe_r.so
#3 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
that tells me, that he is for some reason unable to read the executable I provided, but thats impossible because I'm sure the exe is correct. Might this be another result of the fact that it was not compiled for debugging?
My Question is: Is there another way to read dump core files? What can I do to make GDB work the way I need.
EDIT1: I also ran my own set of tests and watched, if the memory requirements for the process increased. On my enviroment, no leak was apparent. So it is specific for enviroment of my client (and, perhaps, specific to message loads that my program has to carry out)
We have an embedded version of Linux kernel running on a MIPs core. The Programme we have written runs a particular test suite. During one of the stress tests (runs for about 12hrs) we get a seg fault. This in turn generates a core dump.
Unfortunately the core dump is not very useful. The crash is in some system library that is dynamically linked (probably pthread or glibc). The backtrace in the core dump is not helpful because it only shows the crash point and no other callers (our user space app is built with -g -O0, but still no back trace info):
Cannot access memory at address 0x2aab1004
(gdb) bt
#0 0x2ab05d18 in ?? ()
warning: GDB can't find the start of the function at 0x2ab05d18.
GDB is unable to find the start of the function at 0x2ab05d18
and thus can't determine the size of that function's stack frame.
This means that GDB may be unable to access that stack frame, or
the frames below it.
This problem is most likely caused by an invalid program counter or
stack pointer.
However, if you think GDB should simply search farther back
from 0x2ab05d18 for code which looks like the beginning of a
function, you can increase the range of the search using the `set
heuristic-fence-post' command.
Another unfortunate-ness is that we cannot run gdb/gdbserver. gdb/gdbserver keeps breaking on __nptl_create_event. Seeing that the test creates threads, timers and destroys then every 5s it is almost impossible to sit for a long time hitting continue on them.
EDIT:
Another note, backtrace and backtrace_symbols is not supported on our toolchain.
Hence:
Is there a way of trapping seg fault and generate more backtrace data, stack pointers, call stack, etc.?
Is there a way of getting more data from a core dump that crashed in a .so file?
Thanks.
GDB can't find the start of the function at 0x2ab05d18
What is at that address at the time of the crash?
Do info shared, and find out if there is a library that contains that address.
The most likely cause of your troubles: did you run strip libpthread.so.0 before uploading it to your target? Don't do that: GDB requires libpthread.so.0 to not be stripped. If your toolchain contains libpthread.so.0 with debug symbols (and thus too large for the target), run strip -g on it, not a full strip.
Update:
info shared produced Cannot access memory at address 0x2ab05d18
This means that GDB can not access the shared library list (which would then explain the missing stack trace). The most usual cause: the binary that actually produced the core does not match the binary you gave to GDB. A less common cause: your core dump was truncated (perhaps due to ulimit -c being set too low).
If all else fails run the command using the debugger!
Just put "gdb" in form of your normal start command and enter "c"ontinue to get the process running. When the task segfaults it will return to the interactive gdb prompt rather than core dump. You should then be able to get more meaningful stack traces etc.
Another option is to use "truss" if it is available. This will tell you which system calls were being used at the time of the abend.
I'm having trouble with an research project.
What i am trying to is to use ptrace to watch the execution of a target process.
With the help of ptrace i am injecting a mprotect syscall into the targets code segment (similar to a breakpoint) and set the stack protection to PROT_NONE.
After that i restore the original instructions and let the target continue.
When i get an invalid permisson segfault i again inject the syscall to unprotect the stack again and afterwards i execute the instruction which caused the segfault and protect the stack again.
(This does indeed work for simple programs.)
My problem now is, that with this setup the target (pretty) randomly crashes in library function calls (no matter whether i use dynamic or static linking).
By crashing i mean, it either tries to access memory which for some reason is not mapped, or it just keeps hanging in the function __lll_lock_wait_private (that was following a malloc call).
Let me emphasis again, that the crashes don't always happen and don't always happen at the same positions.
It kind of sounds like an synchronisation problem but as far as i can tell (meaning i looked into /proc/pid/tasks/) there is only one thread running.
So do you have any clue what could be the reason for this?
Please tell me your suggestions even if you are not sure, i am running out of ideas here ...
It's also possible the non-determinism is created by address space randomization.
You may want to disable that to try and make the problem more deterministic.
EDIT:
Given that turning ASR off 'fixes' the problem then maybe the under-lying problem might be:
Somewhere thinking 0 is invalid when it should be valid, or visaversa. (What I had).
Using addresses from one run against a different run?
I have a program which produces a fatal error with a testcase, and I can locate the problem by reading the log and the stack trace of the fatal - it turns out that there is a read operation upon a null pointer.
But when I try to attach gdb to it and set a breakpoint around the suspicious code, the null pointer just cannot be observed! The program works smoothly without any error.
This is a single-process, single-thread program, I didn't experience this kind of thing before. Can anyone give me some comments? Thanks.
Appended: I also tried to call pause() syscall before the fatal-trigger code, and expected to make the program sleep before fatal point and then attach the gdb on it on-the-fly, sadly, no fatal occurred.
It's only guesswork without looking at the code, but debuggers sometimes do this:
They initialize certain stuff for you
The timing of the operations is changed
I don't have a quote on GDB, but I do have one on valgrind (granted the two do wildly different things..)
My program crashes normally, but doesn't under Valgrind, or vice versa. What's happening?
When a program runs under Valgrind,
its environment is slightly different
to when it runs natively. For example,
the memory layout is different, and
the way that threads are scheduled is
different.
Same would go for GDB.
Most of the time this doesn't make any
difference, but it can, particularly
if your program is buggy.
So the true problem is likely in your program.
There can be several things happening.. The timing of the application can be changed, so if it's a multi threaded application it is possible that you for example first set the ready flag and then copy the data into the buffer, without debugger attached the other thread might access the buffer before the buffer is filled or some pointer is set.
It's could also be possible that some application has anti-debug functionality. Maybe the piece of code is never touched when running inside a debugger.
One way to analyze it is with a core dump. Which you can create by ulimit -c unlimited then start the application and when the core is dumped you could load it into gdb with gdb ./application ./core You can find a useful write-up here: http://www.ffnn.nl/pages/articles/linux/gdb-gnu-debugger-intro.php
If it is an invalid read on a pointer, then unpredictable behaviour is possible. Since you already know what is causing the fault, you should get rid of it asap. In general, expect the unexpected when dealing with faulty pointer operations.